It has been demonstrated that sociocultural environment has a significant impact on human behavior. This contribution focuses on differences in the perception of attractiveness of European (Czech) faces as rated by Czechs of European origin, Vietnamese persons living in the Czech Republic and Vietnamese who permanently reside in Vietnam. We investigated whether attractiveness judgments and preferences for facial sex-typicality and averageness in Vietnamese who grew up and live in the Czech Republic are closer to the judgements and preferences of Czech Europeans or to those of Vietnamese born and residing in Vietnam. We examined the relative contribution of sexual shape dimorphism and averageness to the perception of facial attractiveness across all three groups of raters. Czech Europeans, Czech Vietnamese, and Asian Vietnamese raters of both sexes rated facial portraits of 100 Czech European participants (50 women and 50 men, standardized, non-manipulated) for attractiveness. Taking Czech European ratings as a standard for Czech facial attractiveness, we showed that Czech Vietnamese assessments of attractiveness were closer to this standard than assessments by the Asian Vietnamese. Among all groups of raters, facial averageness positively correlated with perceived attractiveness, which is consistent with the "average is attractive" hypothesis. A marginal impact of sexual shape dimorphism on attractiveness rating was found only in Czech European male raters: neither Czech Vietnamese nor Asian Vietnamese raters of either sex utilized traits associated with sexual shape dimorphism as a cue of attractiveness. We thus conclude that Vietnamese people permanently living in the Czech Republic converge with Czechs of Czech origin in perceptions of facial attractiveness and that this population adopted some but not all Czech standards of beauty.

Department of Philosophy and History of Science Faculty of Science Charles University Vinicna 7 Prague 128 44 Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Müllerová P. Vietnamese DIASPORA in the Czech Republic. Arch. Orient. 1998;66:121–126.

Kleisner K, Chvátalová V, Flegr J. Perceived intelligence is associated with measured intelligence in men but not women. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e81237. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081237. PubMed DOI PMC

Třebický V, Havlíček J, Roberts SC, Little AC, Kleisner K. Perceived aggressiveness predicts fighting performance in mixed-martial-arts fighters. Psychol. Sci. 2013;24:1664–1672. doi: 10.1177/0956797613477117. PubMed DOI

Linke L, Saribay SA, Kleisner K. Perceived trustworthiness is associated with position in a corporate hierarchy. Pers. Individ. Dif. 2016;99:22–27. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.076. DOI

Little AC, Třebický V, Havlíček J, Roberts SC, Kleisner K. Human perception of fighting ability: Facial cues predict winners and losers in mixed martial arts fights. Behav. Ecol. 2015;1:089.

Todorov A, Olivola CY, Dotsch R, Mende-Siedlecki P. Social attributions from faces: Determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Psychology. 2015;66:519. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143831. PubMed DOI

Schmälzle R, et al. Visual cues that predict intuitive risk perception in the case of HIV. PLoS ONE. 2019;14:e0211770. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211770. PubMed DOI PMC

Asch SE. Forming impressions of personality. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 1946;41:258–290. doi: 10.1037/h0055756. PubMed DOI

Bar M, Neta M, Linz H. Very first impressions. Emotion. 2006;6:269–278. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.6.2.269. PubMed DOI

Willis J, Todorov A. First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychol. Sci. 2006;17:592–598. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x. PubMed DOI

Bothwell RK, Brigham JC, Malpass RS. Cross-racial identification. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1989;15:19–25. doi: 10.1177/0146167289151002. DOI

Meissner CA, Brigham JC. Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Public Policy Law. 2001;7:3. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.3. DOI

Sporer SL. Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. Psychol. Public Policy Law. 2001;7:36–97. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.36. DOI

Hugenberg K, Young SG, Bernstein MJ, Sacco DF. The categorization-individuation model: An integrative account of the other-race recognition deficit. Psychol. Rev. 2010;117:1168–1187. doi: 10.1037/a0020463. PubMed DOI

Anzures G, et al. Developmental origins of the other-race effect. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2013;22:173–178. doi: 10.1177/0963721412474459. PubMed DOI PMC

Suhrke J, et al. The other-race effect in 3-year-old German and Cameroonian children. Front. Psychol. 2014;5:198. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00198. PubMed DOI PMC

Sangrigoli S, de Schonen S. Effect of visual experience on face processing: A developmental study of inversion and non-native effects. Dev. Sci. 2004;7:74–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00324.x. PubMed DOI

Scott LS, Monesson A. The origin of biases in face perception. Psychol. Sci. 2009;20:676–680. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02348.x. PubMed DOI

Ma F, Xu F, Luo X. Children’s and Adults}’ {Judgments of Facial {Trustworthiness}: The {Relationship} to Facial {Attractiveness} Percept. Mot. Skills. 2015;121:179–198. doi: 10.2466/27.22.PMS.121c10x1. PubMed DOI

Tanaka JW, Kiefer M, Bukach CM. A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: Evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cognition. 2004;93:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.011. PubMed DOI

Webster Michael A, MacLeod Donald IA. Visual adaptation and face perception. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2011;366:1702–1725. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0360. PubMed DOI PMC

Bukach CM, Cottle J, Ubiwa J, Miller J. Individuation experience predicts other-race effects in holistic processing for both Caucasian and Black participants. Cognition. 2012;123:319–324. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.02.007. PubMed DOI

Třebický V, et al. Cross-{cultural} evidence for apparent {racial} outgroup {advantage}: Congruence between perceived {facial} aggressiveness and fighting {success} Sci. Rep. 2018;8:9767. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-27751-0. PubMed DOI PMC

Hebl MR, Williams MJ, Sundermann JM, Kell HJ, Davies PG. Selectively friending: Racial stereotypicality and social rejection. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2012;48:1329–1335. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.05.019. DOI

Cassidy KD, Quinn KA, Humphreys GW. The influence of ingroup/outgroup categorization on same- and other-race face processing: The moderating role of inter- versus intra-racial context. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2011;47:811–817. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.017. DOI

Johnson KJ, Fredrickson BL. We all look the same to Mepositive emotions eliminate the own-race bias in face recognition. Psychol. Sci. 2005;16:875–881. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01631.x. PubMed DOI PMC

Bernstein MJ, Young SG, Hugenberg K. The cross-category effect: Mere social categorization is sufficient to elicit an own-group bias in face recognition. Psychol. Sci. 2007;18:706–712. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01964.x. PubMed DOI

Hugenberg K, Miller J, Claypool HM. Categorization and individuation in the cross-race recognition deficit: Toward a solution to an insidious problem. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2007;43:334–340. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.02.010. DOI

Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2011;366:1638–1659. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0404. PubMed DOI PMC

Langlois JH, et al. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol. Bull. 2000;126:390–423. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390. PubMed DOI

Penton-Voak IS, Jacobson A, Trivers R. Populational differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: Comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2004;25:355–370. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.06.002. DOI

Saxton TK, Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Roberts SC. Adolescents' preferences for sexual dimorphism are influenced by relative exposure to male and female faces. Pers. Individ. Dif. 2009;47:864–868. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.005. DOI

Badaruddoza A. A paradox of human mate preferences and natural selection. J. Hum. Ecol. 2007;21:195–197. doi: 10.1080/09709274.2007.11905972. DOI

Coetzee V, Greeff JM, Stephen ID, Perrett DI. Cross-cultural agreement in facial attractiveness preferences: The role of ethnicity and gender. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e99629. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099629. PubMed DOI PMC

Hulse FS. Selection for skin color among the Japanese. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 1967;27:143–155. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330270205. DOI

Kleisner K, et al. African and European perception of African female attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2017;38:744–755. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.07.002. DOI

Kleisner K, Priplatova L, Frost P, Flegr J. Trustworthy-looking face meets brown eyes. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e53285. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053285. PubMed DOI PMC

Zebrowitz LA, Montepare JM, Lee HK. They don't all look alike: Individual impressions of other racial groups. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1993;65:85. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.65.1.85. PubMed DOI

Laeng B, Mathisen R, Johnsen JA. Why do blue-eyed men prefer women with the same eye color? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2007;61:371–384. doi: 10.1007/s00265-006-0266-1. DOI

Gründl M, Knoll S, Eisenmann-Klein M, Prantl L. The blue-eyes stereotype: Do eye color, pupil diameter, and scleral color affect attractiveness? Aesthetic Plast. Surg. 2012;36:234–240. doi: 10.1007/s00266-011-9793-x. PubMed DOI

Langlois JH, Roggman LA. Attractive faces are only average. Psychol. Sci. 1990;1:115–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1990.tb00079.x. DOI

Rhodes G, Tremewan T. Averageness, exaggeration, and facial attractiveness. Psychol. Sci. 1996;7:105–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00338.x. DOI

Rhodes G. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2006;57:199–226. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208. PubMed DOI

Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn. Sci. 1999;3:452–460. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5. PubMed DOI

Rhodes G, et al. Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-western cultures: In search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception. 2001;30:611–625. doi: 10.1068/p3123. PubMed DOI

Langlois JH, Roggman LA, Musselman L. What is average and what is not average about attractive faces? Psychol. Sci. 1994;5:214–220. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00503.x. DOI

Baudouin JY, Tiberghien G. Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychol. 2004;117:313–332. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.07.002. PubMed DOI

Perrett DI, May KA, Yoshikawa S. Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature. 1994;368:239–242. doi: 10.1038/368239a0. PubMed DOI

Alley TR, Cunningham MR. Averaged faces are attractive, but very attractive faces are not average. Psychol. Sci. 1991;2:123–125. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00113.x. DOI

Pittenger JB. On the difficulty of averaging faces: Comments on Langlois and Roggman. Psychol. Sci. 1991;2:351–353. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00164.x. DOI

Komori M, Kawamura S, Ishihara S. Averageness or symmetry: Which is more important for facial attractiveness? Acta Psychol. 2009;131:136–142. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.03.008. PubMed DOI

Rhodes G, Sumich A, Byatt G. Are average facial configurations attractive only because of their symmetry? Psychol. Sci. 1999;10:52–58. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00106. DOI

Scott LS, Tanaka JW, Sheinberg DL, Curran T. The role of category learning in the acquisition and retention of perceptual expertise: A behavioral and neurophysiological study. Brain Res. 2008;1210:204–215. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.02.054. PubMed DOI

Komori M, Kawamura S, Ishihara S. Effect of averageness and sexual dimorphism on the judgment of facial attractiveness. Vis. Res. 2009;49:862–869. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2009.03.005. PubMed DOI

Jones D, Hill K. Criteria of facial attractiveness in five populations. Hum. Nat. 1993;4:271–296. doi: 10.1007/BF02692202. PubMed DOI

Little AC, Connely J, Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Roberts SC. Human preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and smell. Behav. Ecol. 2011;22:862–868. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arr061. DOI

Van den Berghe PL, Frost P. Skin color preference, sexual dimorphism and sexual selection: A case of gene culture co-evolution?*. Ethn. Racial Stud. 1986;9:87–113. doi: 10.1080/01419870.1986.9993516. DOI

Fink B, Neave N, Seydel H. Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 2007;19:82–87. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.20583. PubMed DOI

Scheib Joanna E, Gangestad Steven W, Randy T. Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 1999;266:1913–1917. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0866. PubMed DOI PMC

Perrett DI, et al. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature. 1998;394:884–887. doi: 10.1038/29772. PubMed DOI

Penton-Voak IS, et al. Menstrual cycle alters face preference [7] Nature. 1999;399:741–742. doi: 10.1038/21557. PubMed DOI

Rhodes G, Hickford C, Jeffery L. Sex-typicality and attractiveness: Are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive? Br. J. Psychol. 2000;91:125–140. doi: 10.1348/000712600161718. PubMed DOI

Kościński K. Facial attractiveness: General patterns of facial preferences. Anthropol. Rev. 2007;70:45–79. doi: 10.2478/v10044-008-0001-9. DOI

Johnston VS, Hagel R, Franklin M, Fink B, Grammer K. Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2001;22:251–267. doi: 10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00066-6. DOI

Scott IM, et al. Human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces may be evolutionarily novel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2014 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1409643111. PubMed DOI PMC

Brooks R, et al. National income inequality predicts women's preferences for masculinized faces better than health does. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2011;278:810–812. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.0964. PubMed DOI PMC

DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM. Further evidence for regional variation in women's masculinity preferences. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 2011;278:813–814.

Dunson DB, Colombo B, Baird DD. Changes with age in the level and duration of fertility in the menstrual cycle. Hum. Reprod. 2002;17:1399–1403. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.5.1399. PubMed DOI

Hassan MAM, Killick SR. Effect of male age on fertility: Evidence for the decline in male fertility with increasing age. Fertil. Steril. 2003;79:1520–1527. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00366-2. PubMed DOI

Buss DM. Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav. Brain Sci. 1989;12:1–14. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00023992. DOI

Maestripieri D, Klimczuk ACE, Traficonte DM, Wilson MC. A greater decline in female facial attractiveness during middle age reflects women's loss of reproductive value. Front. Psychol. 2014;5:1–6. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00179. PubMed DOI PMC

McLellan B, McKelvie SJ. Effects of age and gender on perceived facial attractiveness. Can. J. Behav. Sci. Can. Sci. Comport. 1993;25:135–142. doi: 10.1037/h0078790. DOI

Bovet J, Barkat-Defradas M, Durand V, Faurie C, Raymond M. Women's attractiveness is linked to expected age at menopause. J. Evol. Biol. 2018;31:229–238. doi: 10.1111/jeb.13214. PubMed DOI

Coetzee V, Perrett DI, Stephen ID. Facial adiposity: A cue to health? Perception. 2009;38:1700–1711. doi: 10.1068/p6423. PubMed DOI

Coetzee V, Chen J, Perrett DI, Stephen ID. Deciphering faces: Quantifiable visual cues to weight. Perception. 2010;39:51–61. doi: 10.1068/p6560. PubMed DOI

Schneider TM, Hecht H, Carbon CC. Judging body weight from faces: The height-weight illusion. Perception. 2012;41:121–124. doi: 10.1068/p7140. PubMed DOI

Grillot RL, Simmons ZL, Lukaszewski AW, Roney JR. Hormonal and morphological predictors of women's body attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2014;35:176–183. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.01.001. DOI

Hume DK, Montgomerie R. Facial attractiveness signals different aspects of "quality" in women and men. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2001;22:93–112. doi: 10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00065-9. PubMed DOI

Tovée MJ, Swami V, Furnham A, Mangalparsad R. Changing perceptions of attractiveness as observers are exposed to a different culture. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2006;27:443–456. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.05.004. DOI

Třebický V, Fialová J, Kleisner K, Havlíček J. Focal LENGTH AFFECTS DEPICTED SHAPE AND PERCEPTION OF FACIAL IMAGES. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0149313. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149313. PubMed DOI PMC

Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB. lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. 2017;82:1. doi: 10.18637/jss.v082.i13. DOI

Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical J. 2008;50:346–363. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200810425. PubMed DOI

Rosseel Y. Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 2012;48:37. doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i02. DOI

Adams, D. C., Collyer, M. L. & Kaliontzopoulou, A. Geomorph: Software for geometric morphometric analyses. R package version 3.1.0. (2019).

Mitteroecker P, Windhager S, Müller GB, Schaefer K. The morphometrics of 'masculinity' in human faces. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0118374. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118374. PubMed DOI PMC

Valenzano DR, Mennucci A, Tartarelli G, Cellerino A. Shape analysis of female facial attractiveness. Vis. Res. 2006;46:1282–1291. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.024. PubMed DOI

De Haan M, Pascalis O, Johnson MH. Specialization of neural mechanisms underlying face recognition in human infants. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2002;14:199–209. doi: 10.1162/089892902317236849. PubMed DOI

Kelly DJ, et al. Development of the other-race effect during infancy: Evidence toward universality? J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2009;104:105–114. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2009.01.006. PubMed DOI PMC

Krasotkina A, Götz A, Höhle B, Schwarzer G. Perceptual narrowing in speech and face recognition: Evidence for intra-individual cross-domain relations. Front. Psychol. 2018;9:1711. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01711. PubMed DOI PMC

Kelly DJ, et al. Cross-race preferences for same-race. Infancy. 2007;11:87–95. doi: 10.1207/s15327078in1101_4. PubMed DOI PMC

Kleisner K, et al. How and why patterns of sexual dimorphism in human faces vary across the world. Infancy. 2020 doi: 10.31234/osf.io/7vdmb. PubMed DOI PMC

Hopper WJ, Finklea KM, Winkielman P, Huber DE. Measuring sexual dimorphism with a race-gender face space. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2014;40:1779–1788. doi: 10.1037/a0037743. PubMed DOI

Tan KW, Tiddeman B, Stephen ID. Skin texture and colour predict perceived health in Asian faces. Evol. Hum. Behav. 2018;39:320–335. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.02.003. DOI

Congruence in European and Asian perception of Vietnamese facial attractiveness, averageness, symmetry and sexual dimorphism

Africans and Europeans differ in their facial perception of dominance and sex-typicality: a multidimensional Bayesian approach